VAR Thread

[Zidane98]

Thought VAR deserves a discussion thread of its own about the impact it is going to have on football.

This just happened in Serie A:

https://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/vid...-fiorentin-penalty?playlist=latest-videos-twg

I didn't realise that VAR could go that far back, I was under the impression that the VAR official advises the referee shortly after an incident occurs that it needs reviewing on video. Would the penalty have been given on VAR if SPAL didn't score? To me it seems like they only decided to look at the penalty because of the goal scored at the other end.

 

[SM]

Thought VAR deserves a discussion thread of its own about the impact it is going to have on football.

This just happened in Serie A:

https://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/vid...-fiorentin-penalty?playlist=latest-videos-twg

I didn't realise that VAR could go that far back, I was under the impression that the VAR official advises the referee shortly after an incident occurs that it needs reviewing on video. Would the penalty have been given on VAR if SPAL didn't score? To me it seems like they only decided to look at the penalty because of the goal scored at the other end.

It's been widely documented that as soon as the ball is out of play VAR is consulted, and the scenario posed quite often that a pen could be given with a goal at the other end disallowed. How is this surprising?

 

[Zidane98]

It's been widely documented that as soon as the ball is out of play VAR is consulted, and the scenario posed quite often that a pen could be given with a goal at the other end disallowed. How is this surprising?

The timeframe was surprising, VAR decisions are supposed to be flagged shortly after they happen. A minute had nearly passed with this one and there were no signs of a VAR review being processed until the goal went in. Surely you can't go back to a VAR review if the ball stays in play for 5 minutes after an incident occurs? The VAR referee is supposed to advise immediately whether he/she believe an error has been made.

 

[SM]

The timeframe was surprising, VAR decisions are supposed to be flagged shortly after they happen. A minute had nearly passed with this one and there were no signs of a VAR review being processed until the goal went in. Surely you can't go back to a VAR review if the ball stays in play for 5 minutes after an incident occurs? The VAR referee is supposed to advise immediately whether he/she believe an error has been made.

How many times did the ball go out of play in the clip?

 

[Zidane98]

How many times did the ball go out of play in the clip?

It didn't go out of play but the VAR review procedure should have already have started if they were originally going to review it.


Obviously if a similar incident happens and the ball then stays in play for 5 minutes or so you can't then go back to VAR. There has to be a reasonable time limit on reviews and from what I can ascertain in most competitions that use the system reviews advised by the VAR official should occur almost immediately after the incident.

 

[SM]

It didn't go out of play but the VAR review procedure should have already have started if they were originally going to review it.


Obviously if a similar incident happens and the ball then stays in play for 5 minutes or so you can't then go back to VAR. There has to be a reasonable time limit on reviews and from what I can ascertain in most competitions that use the system reviews advised by the VAR official should occur almost immediately after the incident.

The end.

 

[moomba]

This has probably come up before. There was an incident during the game where Rudiger appealed for a penalty, the game carried on and I think Hazard got booked for a bad tackle.

If VAR decided the penalty was the right decision, does Hazard still get booked?

 

[Zidane98]

This has probably come up before. There was an incident during the game where Rudiger appealed for a penalty, the game carried on and I think Hazard got booked for a bad tackle.

If VAR decided the penalty was the right decision, does Hazard still get booked?

I can find nothing clear and concise about this under the ifab regulations. Although you can still be booked for a bad tackle when the ball is out of play or dead so perhaps in this case the yellow stands.

 

[Zidane98]

Think it is silly the final decision rests with the onfield referee when the video assistants have the complete picture on screen.

If it were up to me I'd have a panel of 5 referees watching and if 4 of them vote a decision is incorrect it then gets reversed.

 

[SM]

This has probably come up before. There was an incident during the game where Rudiger appealed for a penalty, the game carried on and I think Hazard got booked for a bad tackle.

If VAR decided the penalty was the right decision, does Hazard still get booked?

He wouldn't. It'd be like fouling someone when the offside flag goes up. It's not a foul if it's not in play. If it's particularly bad it would come under dangerous play, but not a technical foul.

 

[hawkman]

Does the time that shouldn't have been played between the non penalty decision and the goal get added back on at the end

 

[SM]

Does the time that shouldn't have been played between the non penalty decision and the goal get added back on at the end

Would assume so.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Think it is silly the final decision rests with the onfield referee when the video assistants have the complete picture on screen.

If it were up to me I'd have a panel of 5 referees watching and if 4 of them vote a decision is incorrect it then gets reversed.

disagree. you need consistency. Can't have a strict ref and a lenient video ref and vice versa.

 

[moomba]

First penalty in our game should only have been given by the ref after an on field review apparently.

UEFA supposed to be issuing a statement clarifying.

 

[Zidane98]

First penalty in our game should only have been given by the ref after an on field review apparently.

UEFA supposed to be issuing a statement clarifying.

There is no clear guidelines under IFAB on what to do if VAR tech fails so this isn't entirely true. Looking at the incident if it was described to me over the phone I would give a penalty as the defenders arms were out and he had enough time to avoid the ball if he wanted to.

Second penalty call was correct. Player is only offside when he plays the ball, being in an offside position is not an offence unless within playing distance of the ball / affecting the defender (not the case for second penalty). The foul is punished because it prevents the player being involved in any possible further phase of play (ie an onside player knocks the ball down to him). See Law 11 for further reference.

 

[moomba]

Two pretty weak explanations imo.

 

[Zidane98]

Two pretty weak explanations imo.

Nothing weak about it at all. Everyone knows a player is only offside once they have played the ball. Being in an offside position is not an offence. It's a correct call, your defenders can't do as they please to an opponent just because they are in an offside position.

As for the first incident the referee probably relied upon a description of the incident to rule on it because of the VAR tech failure. Fair enough IMO - though there should be mutiple backups to ensure it doesn't happen again.

 

[moomba]

LOL.

 

[RPCB]

Watch out for Vinícius. 18 years old and such a good footballer. He just needs a better final product but that will come over time.

Real Madrid win 2-1 off two dubious VAR penalty decisions. The first was ball to hand I thought and the second Casemiro was caught on the shin in the penalty area but Casemiro had already passed the ball out of the penalty area and then he was caught on the shin. Also, the foul went to VAR before the Real Madrid player the ball was passed to could put it back into the box to see what would develop from the attack, it went to VAR straight away. I remember SM said a week ago that the referee would let the play develop before going to VAR. Was it done straight away because a player was down in the penalty area?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Everyone knows a player is only offside once they have played the ball. Being in an offside position is not an offence.

Okay.

But...

That doesn't matter because the pass was to Kane who was clearly offside.

Oh dear me

 

[Zidane98]

Okay.

But...



Oh dear me

Harry Kane played the ball - that's the main difference. The pass was to him, the grey area is over what constitutes a new phase of play, some say the deflection of lovren was a new phase of play, others dont.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Harry Kane played the ball - that's the main difference. The pass was to him, the grey area is over what constitutes a new phase of play, some say the deflection of lovren was a new phase of play, others dont.

Bzzzt wrong.
Please correct your contradictions and respond.

Cheers.

 

[Zidane98]

Bzzzt wrong.
Please correct your contradictions and respond.

Cheers.

The only person who is wrong here is you. Harry Kane played a through ball that was passed to him. He was in an offside position when the ball was passed.

The Schalke player who was fouled never played the ball (or got near it).

To claim the two situations are the same is simply wrong. They are completely different and to suggest they are comparable shows a severe lack of understanding about law 11.

Try learning the rules before you reply. That is if you get time to with a your posts obsessing over Arsenal & Hawthorn.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

The only person who is wrong here is you. Harry Kane played a through ball that was passed to him. He was in an offside position when the ball was passed.

The Schalke player who was fouled never played the ball (or got near it).

To claim the two situations are the same is simply wrong. They are completely different and to suggest they are comparable shows a severe lack of understanding about law 11.

Try learning the rules before you reply. That is if you get time to with a your posts obsessing over Arsenal & Hawthorn.

Oh dear zizou.

It’s simple my stupid little scouse pal.
On one hand acknowledge being in an offside position is no offence (correct), on the other hand quash that same notion because Kane played at a ball after Lovren had played him onside in a new phase.

So young man, maybe you should learn rules

http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/...aws-of-the-game/2018-19/law-11---offside.ashx

gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:
• rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar, match official or an opponent
• been deliberately saved by any opponent

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.
contradicts himself.
Accuses someone of needing to learn the rules. Gets it wrong.
As hominem drive by for good measure.